Re: Numba not in testing due to lots of autopkgtest errors - how to proceed
On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 11:23:47AM -0800, Diane Trout wrote: > I pushed numba 0.56.4+dfsg-2 to unstable, and it should be vastly > better than -1. I quickly counted there's about 13 test failures for > what functionality we can support, those failing tests are currently > getting skipped by pythons unittest expectedFailure and skip test > decorators, so autopkgtest will thinks it's clean. > > They have tests for cuda that are ignored, and I had to disable the > onetbb support since they haven't updated to the versions we are > shipping. > > I hope that helps out with hyperspy I confirm it is vastly better than 0.56.4+dfsg-1, thank you so much for your work! On amd64 at least everything works swimmingly, and hyperspy's test suite succeeds \o/ Enrico -- GPG key: 4096R/634F4BD1E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: scikit-learn Re: Are we still trying to do scipy 1.10, given transition freeze?
Hi Drew I think python3-scipy should declare a Breaks on python3-skbio less than the version in unstable (0.5.8-3). This should sort out the autopkgtest regressions of emperor, python-skbio itself, q2-metadata and q2-quality-control, which are all passing in unstable, and allow scipy and python-skbio to migrate together. Python-cooler seems to have a different failure, and I don't see a bug filed for it. Regards Graham
Re: Numba not in testing due to lots of autopkgtest errors - how to proceed
On Fri, 2023-02-03 at 10:56 +0100, Enrico Zini wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 02:21:08PM -0800, Diane Trout wrote: > > Thank you deeply for that! > > From the context of hyperspy[1], if it's not too much trouble to at > some > point upload what you have to experimental it may help testing how > things are improving for reverse dependencies > > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1028548 > > If you're at a stead point in importing packagse, if it can help I > can > try building a new numba package out of git, run the hyperspy test > suite > with it, and let you know if things changed since 0.56.4+dfsg-1 > I pushed numba 0.56.4+dfsg-2 to unstable, and it should be vastly better than -1. I quickly counted there's about 13 test failures for what functionality we can support, those failing tests are currently getting skipped by pythons unittest expectedFailure and skip test decorators, so autopkgtest will thinks it's clean. They have tests for cuda that are ignored, and I had to disable the onetbb support since they haven't updated to the versions we are shipping. I hope that helps out with hyperspy Diane
Re: Numba not in testing due to lots of autopkgtest errors - how to proceed
On Fri, 2023-02-03 at 18:55 +0200, Graham Inggs wrote: > Hi Andreas > > On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 at 12:19, Andreas Tille wrote: > > Thanks a lot for your always helpful support > > You are welcome! > > ~$ rmadison -u debian -s testing python3-numba > python3-numba | 0.56.4+dfsg-1+b1 | testing | amd64, arm64, armel, > armhf, i386, mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x > > numba is now in testing and I filed bug #1030379. I pushed numba 0.56.4+dfsg-2 last night which is in vastly better shape than -1. I manually skipped the approximately 13 tests that are still failing so autopkgtest will pass, but I'm not sure if that counts as closing 1030379 though. Diane
